MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303953014

Algunas consideraciones éticas sobre la experimentación animal en los centros de enseñanza médica superior

2002· article· es· W4303953014 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roberto R. de la Peña Pino

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2002
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Se realizó un análisis donde se tomó como referencia obligada el conjunto de leyes y regulaciones más importantes puestas en vigor por los países miembros de la Comunidad Europea, quienes también han creado grupos de trabajo encargados del flujo de información de todo tipo, incluidas las nuevas legislaciones, uso de alternativas y el control sobre los procedimientos en los experimentos, entre otras funciones. Se incluyó también lo regulado en Canadá y EE.UU. y al referirse a Cuba se explica lo hecho hasta el presente en materia de protección con respecto al uso de los animales a través de las medidas dictadas por el Centro de Producción de Animales de Laboratorio. Se analizó la situación específica de los centros de investigación y docencia de Ciencias Médicas, señalando las deficiencias más comunes que pueden presentarse por la inadecuada aplicación de los principios éticos y las disposiciones secundarias orientadas por el Consejo de Organizaciones Internacionales de Ciencias Médicas. Finalmente, con el propósito de revertir los aspectos negativos, se sugieren los procedimientos necesarios a seguir por los Comité de Ética en cada centro y la Comisión Nacional de Ética Médica. An analysis was made taking as a compulsory reference the set of the most important laws and regulations put into effect by the member countries of the European Community that have also created working groups in charge of the flow of information of any type, including the new legislations, use of alternatives and the control of the procedures in the experiments, among other functions. It was also included what was established by Canada and the United States and, on referring to Cuba, it is explained what has been done up to now as regards the use of animals by a series of measurements taken by the Center of Production of Laboratory Animals. The specific situation of the research and teaching centers of Medical Sciences was approached, making emphasis on the most common deficiencies that may appear as a result of an inadequate application of the ethic principles and of the secondary resolutions of the Council of International Medical Sciences Organizations. Finally, the steps to be taken by the Ethic Committee in each center and by the National Medical Ethic Commission are suggested in order to face the negative aspects.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.434
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.166 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicAnimal testing and alternativesFrench-language works237,207